Christian Louboutin Presents...80s Neon?

As I was driving around Dallas yesterday, I decided to wander through the cute and cozy Highland Park Village.  I spotted the Christian Louboutin boutique, and hoping to find really cute shoes in the window, was instead taken aback by the plethora of neon-colored heels--orange, turquoise, yellow--clogging up the glass. 

As much as I love pretty much everything about the 80s I simply cannot get on board with the neon Louboutin heels with spikes.  Louboutin creates beautiful shoes but this neon..."fashion" reminded me of cranky sea urchins or even worse those "As Seen on TV" spiky rubber laundry dryer-ball-thingies that are advertised during late night sitcom reruns.  What am I missing here?  I love theatrical fashion, but these shoes were an assault on my senses.  Are these supposed to be sexy on a woman?  The only time or place I could see them being worn is perhaps during a pseudo-punk music video where some unidentified I-hate-the-bore-of-bourgeois model plots hyper-feministic revenge on her former lover by "kicking him where it counts" (yes, admitting I would delightfully use that phrase in the third grade to warn a scrawny but determined little boy named Scott to stop chasing me on the playground).  On a side note, after leaving the store and driving some more through Dallas, I had to wonder...why is there always one single cow who has wandered off away from the herd in the field, standing at the edge of the fence and people watching to boot?  Perhaps I just answered my own question about the aesthetics of the Louboutin neon spike--only for those who dare to step away from the herd?

The Bachelorette Emily Maynard Picked Jef Holm for His Fashion Sense

Jef Holm's suit and tie = good

Call me crazy but Emily Maynard picked Jef Holm because of the way he dresses.  I'll admit it's not the only reason of course (true love?  well I can't go that far) but when explaining why she loves him she said herself that his "style" is what stood out to her when choosing him.  The thing is, as much as The Bachelorette has more cheese than a French fromagerie, Emily is right--Jef does know how to dress.  Hooray for skinny ties and suits!  More please.  I know most straight men reading this (and if any straight men are reading this I consider that a major accomplishment in the fashion blog world) are rolling their eyes right at this moment.  But men have to remember that just as they like women to be put together we would really like to see the same thing in our guys no matter how much of a man's man they consider themselves to be.  Frankly the fact that Jef referenced a Chloe handbag on the show was a bit frightening in the he-knows-a-little-too-much-about-fashion category, but don't worry guys--we certainly would not expect you to know handbag brands unless they are on our birthday wish list. 

Wardrobe Trailer Facebook

To Rome with Love - The Fashion of American Women?

Judy Davis as Phyllis

Feminine wares of To Rome with Love?

So I ventured off to see To Rome with Love and it was more of a like.  I'm not sure what Director Woody Allen and Costume Designer Sonia Grande are trying to communicate about American women throughout this film.  Both Ellen Page's character Monica and her best friend Sally (Greta Gerwig) for the most part are clad in low rise jeans with button down shirts and masculine-reading likely-Italian-leather belts.  Both give off the vibe of 21-year-old boys dressed to go into a local bar rather than dressing as the sexy love interests that the film purports them to be.  Even Allen's character Jerry has a wife Phyllis (Judy Davis) who is draped in dull outfits (if you can call them that) and T-shirts.  All three American women look breast-less and androgynous.  Upon first glance a feminist may say this is a good thing--women don't need to wear skin-revealing outfits a la Scarlett Johansson to appear feminine.  I agree.  But in this case it comes off as making women look like they are trying to look more like men.

Perhaps Allen is attempting to highlight Penelope Cruz by shoving the other female characters in baggy attire.  Cruz's tight red dress can only make her stand out from the other women, but unfortunately the costume enforces the cliched Italian prostitute who doesn't have much to say but has much to do with her clients.  Cruz looks amazing, but I would rather have seen her clothed in something more surprising and quirky.  I will say, however, that the red dress is so ridiculous that it has a humorous life of its own.  So while Cruz and the other Italian female characters give off their feminine charms in dresses the American female characters linger in their western wear.

Regardless of the costumes, Allen delivers with his usual characters filled with neurotic tendencies, insecurities, and palatable narcissism.  Such consistency in Allen's films is what makes his films work.  In an age when most people only post flattering pictures and personality traits on their Facebook profiles, it's nice to go to a fiction film to get a slice of reality where people are just people, wrought with problems.

Like us on Facebook

Midnight in Paris: Nostalgia is Denial?

I don't agree with what Paul says in Midnight in Paris.  Granted, he is arguably the most annoying character in the film with his overwhelming expert-on-everything personality (which happens to be one of my most loathed character flaws).  Luckily the irritation leads to my laughter as I watch him stumble about with his bloviating and his nonsensical expertise.  But is there any credence to what he says?

Paul:  "Nostalgia is denial - denial of the painful present... the name for this denial is golden age thinking - the erroneous notion that a different time period is better than the one ones living in - it's a flaw in the romantic imagination of those people who find it difficult to cope with the present."

Nostalgia isn't acknowledgement of a painful present.  Nostalgia is the incorporation of the beauty of the past with the beauty of the present.  That's all.

Take my recent acquisition of a circa 1960's permanent press duster dress from Monnig's Fort Worth department store.  The once-favored department store is now a parking lot.  A parking lot certainly can't reflect the beauty of what was once three buildings crudely constructed with a brick facade to house thousands of American-made merchandise.  Avocado green, yellow gold, blue and pink fabric with the original Monnig's tags?  A 50-plus-year-old piece of merchandise that has made it this far without rips, tears, or stains deserves a little bit of applause. 

Even from Paul.  Who would hate it.  And would likely say it was some sort of fabric-based-material psychotherapy.

3 Things to Do When Shopping at Antique Malls and Thrift Stores

1.  Look down.  Sounds obvious, but a lot of people don't do this.  Most people look forward at eye level when they shop.  Some of the best deals I've scored have been items that were shoved in the bottom of a shelf.  Last week I found two reasonably priced items in really good condition tucked away--vintage Audrey Hepburn-esque Givenchy shoes and a circa 1890s Victorian fairy lamp. 

2.  Buy what you like.  Another one that sounds obvious.  Don't worry if you think your friends or your mother will hate it.  Trust your instincts.  Surround yourself with what you like.  I'm always amazed out how some people won't buy what they like because they're afraid of what others will think of it.  Also be sure to buy it when you see it.  I found a couture vintage Neiman Marcus wedding dress and I figured I'd go back and get it later thinking that no one else could possibly want it, but sure enough it was long gone when I returned.

3.  See things out of context.  Sometimes the gems are surrounded by some really ugly stuff, so your eye might lump the gems into the ugly category.  A couple of weeks ago there was a pair of vintage Henredon chairs surrounded by some really ugly furniture, and had I not been paying attention my eye might have skipped right over them without even realizing it.  Try to see beyond the musty and dusty so that you don't miss the really great stuff.  One of the beautiful things about vintage pieces is that most of them are not made in China so you're buying quality items instead of those that are mass-produced and mediocre. 

Young Adult

Young Adult should be called Jung Adult.  The reason why David C. Robinson's costumes are so appealing is that he makes clear delineations between Mavis' Jung-like psychological stages--who Mavis wants to be and who Mavis thinks she should be.  Mavis' outer appearance can't help her assume her desired persona which makes watching her slip into her alcoholism and depression all the more uncomfortable to witness.  Too bad good old Carl isn't around to step into the film and help her have a much-needed spiritual experience to drive away that craving for whiskey.

Mavis' transitions from sweats to leather to tweed do nothing to help her make a transition to a better life.  Somehow watching Mavis in a mustard cardigan and a tweed-trimmed dress is more distressing than watching her shuffle around in her juvenile Hello Kitty shirt and sweats.  [On a side note, why do grown women still like Hello Kitty?  Women won't be caught carrying around a Barbie pencil case, for instance, but I reluctantly admit I have seen a woman or two pull out Hello Kitty pencil cases in my graduate school classes.  Help.  Someone explain.] 

The one constant is the gold heart necklace Mavis wears, yes the heart-of-gold-inference, that perfectly symbolizes what is really going on inside.  The close-up shots of her wearing her heart necklace are intense when you look closely and you can see the pendant move up and down with the beat of her heart.

Film critics claim that Mavis is a narcissist but I disagree.  To a point she is self absorbed but why shouldn't she be when all she desperately wants is for someone to simply care about her enough to understand her without judgement and to fulfill her emotional needs?  I think it best to call in Jung for an assessment.

When Harry Met Sally...When Actresses Wore Clothes

After watching When Harry Met Sally for the umpteenth time the other night, I realized it seemed a bit dated.  Why?  Not the clothes of the 70s, 80s, or 90s.  It was that the lead female character actually had clothes on.  Sweaters, blazers, jackets, belts, gloves, hats, boots.  Even menswear shoes.  Refreshing. 

It's not that showing off the female form is bad, and it's not that every movie nowadays jumps on the let's-make-a-deal-and-get-the-actress-naked train, but sometimes don't you want to watch a film for the sake of the story as opposed to being distracted, perhaps subconsciously, by the fact that the lead actress is half naked here, half naked there?  (Men don't answer this).  There seems to be current costuming formulas in Hollywood at the moment.  They're not new formulas, but the results are getting tiring and drab, trite and cliche.  Some well-known formulas may include:

tight tank top at some point + short shorts or skirt = Jennifer Aniston
overblown cleavage + beaucoup de lipstick = Scarlett Johansonn
tight pants + exposed midriff at some point in film = any Transformers actress
socks + underwear + open mens shirt = Cameron Diaz

To give these actresses the doubt, let us acknowledge that they have fabulous bodies to show off and can hopefully laugh all the way to the bank when their agents negotiate more money for them as they show off their beauty, even when much of the time body double skin is being used anyway.  So in that sense, I can't blame them. 

Beyond actresses, I even caught Ann Curry wearing oversexualized high heels (you know, the at-least-six-inch) during her interview with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.  The interview, re-posted on the Internet, seems to now have been scrubbed to only feature medium close ups so we don't see the shoes.  Really Ann?  Were you trying to get arrested?  "Hooker heels" -- as Rachel Zoe affectionately calls them.  As much as I love Rachel Zoe, since when have "hooker heels," designed to make women look like oversexualized caricatures, become a good thing?

Even though Sally and Harry had intimate moments, at least the lead female was for once under a cotton sheet instead of the standard Hollywood sheet of skin.  No really, they say, the nudity is required.  For realism.  For the story.